223 For Whitetail ?

Status
Not open for further replies.
I always get a kick out of the energy arguments. What is the threshold for minimum amount of footpounds required to kill a deer? Seriously, what is the pure base minimum? 1 lb ft? 100 lb ft? 1000 lb ft? 10 000? Is there a number where if it passes with the fringe skin of an animal it is absolutely instantaneously dead? Likely, but probably not from shoulder fired weapons.
At what point do lungs that are popped by a 375 UltraMag and not working kill faster than lungs that have a smaller hole through them and not working? Both interupt the flow of oxygen to the brain resulting in death. Both will likely take A similar amount of time, no?

Vital organ disruption is what kills animals, and choosing an appropriate bullet and putting it in an appropriate place kills animals efficiently. Sometimes you will see anomalies and some animals will defy logic, but that, for the purpose of this discussion, isn't a function of cartridge performance.
Push a bullet fast enough to ensure expansion and tissue damage in places that matter, and it will result in dead animals.
 
What the frig is the point... if you are subsistance hunting and a .223 is all you have, then shoot & good luck... I doubt that applies to anyone chiming in on this thread.
 
The results you'll observe from the use of a rifle bullet on big game are directly proportional to the design and construction of the bullet you choose, and to the velocity of it's impact. In this respect I consider the use of sub-bore cartridges for big game best left to the experts; that is experts who are knowledgeable concerning bullet construction and that construction's affect on terminal performance, in addition to being expert field marksmen, and hunters. With respect to velocity, the .223 certainly has enough velocity for it's bullets to perform as advertised, the question then is whether the maximum range at which the retained velocity will cause the bullet to upset sufficiently for the expected performance to occur is known to the hunter, and this is important regardless of the cartridge chosen.

For a number of reasons I prefer that my bullet exits, but an exit wound isn't necessary for the bullet to work as designed and kill the animal in a quick humane fashion. Provided the bullet expands quickly enough to create a massive permanent wound channel, destroying the organs essential to sustain life, it has succeeded in doing all that can be asked of it. But, should that bullet fragment on a rib, and fail to penetrate, the result being a shallow non-lethal wound, it has failed and failed miserably, the game animal will suffer a horrific injury, and will, in all likelihood, escape. If you have a pair of .224/55 gr bullets impacting at 3000 fps, the energy deposited upon the target is identical, but one bullet penetrates deeply while the other grenades on impact. The bullet's performance and effectiveness is not determined by kinetic energy, but by it's design and construction.

So bullet choice is paramount, but its much easier to purchase a box of factory .223s that are designed for prairie dogs, or for punching paper than it is to find a box loaded with true game bullets. And lets face it, if the hunter knows little about how bullet construction affects terminal performance, he won't be inclined to purchase a box of Vor-TX that cost half again as much as the ones loaded with thin skinned cup and core bullets. Some ammunition manufacturers try to help by putting pictures of animal silhouettes on their ammo boxes, but that doesn't always get the message across.

Finally, what is the hunter's habit having fired that initial shot? Does he lower his rifle to appreciate his handiwork, only to realize his quarry has regained it's feet, and is on the move? Then he fumbles around in an attempt cycle the action at waist level, then attempts to reacquire his target, that is already disappearing in thick cover. Or does he, at the sound of the first shot, instantly run the action, while the rifle is at his shoulder, so he can deliver a fast follow-up shot, while the game still provides a mostly visible, stationary, easy to hit target. The light recoil typical of the sub-bore rifle, should result in the hunter's ability to make a quicker follow-up shot, but it takes practice to master it, and a degree of knowledge to even know about it. IMHO, the novice is better off with a bit more gun.
 
Last edited:
KodiakHntr said:
I always get a kick out of the energy arguments. What is the threshold for minimum amount of footpounds required to kill a deer? Seriously, what is the pure base minimum? 1 lb ft? 100 lb ft? 1000 lb ft? 10 000? Is there a number where if it passes with the fringe skin of an animal it is absolutely instantaneously dead? Likely, but probably not from shoulder fired weapons.
At what point do lungs that are popped by a 375 UltraMag and not working kill faster than lungs that have a smaller hole through them and not working? Both interupt the flow of oxygen to the brain resulting in death. Both will likely take A similar amount of time, no?

Vital organ disruption is what kills animals, and choosing an appropriate bullet and putting it in an appropriate place kills animals efficiently. Sometimes you will see anomalies and some animals will defy logic, but that, for the purpose of this discussion, isn't a function of cartridge performance.
Push a bullet fast enough to ensure expansion and tissue damage in places that matter, and it will result in dead animals.
Click to expand...

Energy is the one thing that can be calculated accurately I suppose, that's why. For the most part it's an indicator as to whether you've got a big enough platform, because...as Boomer posted bullet construction is also a big part of the deal.
Personally, I'd think a 223 should be enough to suffice, if things go as planned. 5.56 was designed as an anti-personnel round IIRC. The logic being a 30-06 buried 16" in the dirt behind the dead enemy is wasted energy ( and limits the amount of effective ammo a soldier can carry). The 5.56 was designed to expend it's energy rapidly inside the enemy.
I've got Grandpa's favorite deer rifle in a safe downstairs; a 22 Hornet Savage 219. Why don't I use it to hunt deer with as he did? Because it's too small and doesn't pack enough energy.
The 223 it seems; is on the fence as far as energy, some will & some won't.
Depends on what a hunter considers humane & sporting. I'm getting closer to a hippie as time goes past; I feel for the deer and strive to put them down as effectively as possible...still shy from Magnums for the most part, wreck too much meat IMO.
I think the 223 is a tad unsuited myself, but as I'd stated " I really don't have experience with it "
Just seems like there are much better choices out there
 
Gawd, this has degenerated to the 9mm vs .45 ACP level .....

How 'bout we let the results speak for themselves? There's a thread on GunNutz where a guy is asking for pics of game taken with Black Rifles. Check it out.

In the meantime, let's get into serious discussion of an age old, weighty question - how many angels can dance on the head of a pin?
 
Black rifles are fun to shoot and guys hunting coyotes always look like ther having a blast but ....
if your hunting for food your not going to grab a black rifle
At home the sitka deer are small and are hunted at Close range under 50 yards for food most guys hunt with 30-06 ,243,7.62x39
Ther is no advantage to hunting deer with a 223 especially bigger deer such as Whitetail
 


The halibut I am just showing off lol the deer carcass Hanging from the mas is a sitka deer Shot with a 223 at about 20 yards
The 223 was the only rifle on the boat so that was what I used
y
 
No advantage?
I've yet to see an average hunter shoot a 300wsm better than they can shoot a small bore.

The thing that so many people here forget, is that the ONLY thing that makes you a good shot is actually shooting. The thing that makes people capable killers with a rifle is knowing your rifle, and knowing anatomy well enough to put bullets where they belong.

I would much rather see a new hunter put 500 rounds through a 223 over a summer actually shooting it and learning it, than that same person putting 10 rounds through his new 300wsm and heading out with his remaining half box of shells.....
 
KodiakHntr said:
No advantage?
I've yet to see an average hunter shoot a 300wsm better than they can shoot a small bore.

The thing that so many people here forget, is that the ONLY thing that makes you a good shot is actually shooting. The thing that makes people capable killers with a rifle is knowing your rifle, and knowing anatomy well enough to put bullets where they belong.

I would much rather see a new hunter put 500 rounds through a 223 over a summer actually shooting it and learning it, than that same person putting 10 rounds through his new 300wsm and heading out with his remaining half box of shells.....
Click to expand...

I don't see a advantage to a 300wsm or 223 we kill a lot of deer each year it may not be what you want to hear but it's the truth the phot is my Friends photo I was not at that hunt they wear using 30-06
The small spike I shot wen I was waiting for cataract surgery and almost blind

 
I personally don't care if you used a 17 hornet or a 458 winchester to kill 100 deer a year.

I am merely pointing out that the small bores are perfectly capable deer killers, despite what the naysayers assume, if you use an appropriate bullet.

However, I will point out, that for guys who are capable, any rifle/cartridge combination will work....for those that aren't, well, they should hedge their bets as best they can........
 
hawk-i said:
Carverk....thats a pile of deer...what will you do with all of them?
Click to expand...


Eat them lol we take what we need for are family and give the rest to the old and single mothers
I know small bore work I have killed deer with 22 lr a lot of them
but I know Frum first hand exerance the guy hunting with a 30-06 will get a lot more deer
And you are right about one thing I have killed way over a 100 deer in my life with every thing from 22 lr up to 444marlen so I just mite know a bit about it
 
Last edited:
KodiakHntr said:
I personally don't care if you used a 17 hornet or a 458 winchester to kill 100 deer a year.

I am merely pointing out that the small bores are perfectly capable deer killers, despite what the naysayers assume, if you use an appropriate bullet.

However, I will point out, that for guys who are capable, any rifle/cartridge combination will work....for those that aren't, well, they should hedge their bets as best they can........
Click to expand...

How many Deer have you killed ?
The photo with all the deer is not a cull just a typical Hunting trip on Haida Gwaii
 
carverk said:
How many Deer have you killed ?
The photo with all the deer is not a cull just a typical Hunting trip on Haida Gwaii
Click to expand...

I stopped keeping track 10 or 15 years ago, but into triple digits....as well as black bear, grizzly, elk, moose, sheep, cats, coyotes, wolves, etc, etc.
Your point?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom